You mention mental illnesses, but not a specific illness.
In my case, it is an illness, and although I didn't get a brain scan to be diagnosed, it's fairly obvious I have an illness.
And I feel tons better with the pills.
Chemical imbalance? Isn't that more of a pop-psychology term? It's never been described to much as that by a psychiatrist. Depression is an illness where low serotonin is found. The drugs help me retain serotonin.
Surprisingly, chemical imbalance is a proper medical term and is generally believed to be causative in most mental illnesses. The problem with depression is that nobody has established if low serotonin causes depression or if depression causes low serotonin. Either way, drugs that influence serotonin levels will change mood but that's also why taking Ecstasy makes people feel good. It's just that the pills you're on a better balanced so as not to overstimulate serotonin production.
The information I get with the pills has always stated that it's not exactly clear how the pills work.
But that's true with a lot of things. So many medications were actually intended for something else altogether.
Serotonin can also be produced by eating certain foods, and also excercise. However you probably won't be able to focus on either of these things with severe depression, so the pills are a kickstart.
Brain scans have shown larger empty spaces in the brains of Schizophrenics than in normal controls. Also brain shrinkage has been measured in bipolar patients. These aren't tests they are proof that these conditions exist. I was extremely ill before diagnosis and treatment and I know too many people who are Schizophrenic and bipolar who suffer greatly without the help of psychiatry.
look mate i have been searching the net about this subject, i would enjoy to be able to talk to you over the phone about this subject, please get in touch with me, thanks my name is micky bolton and my number is 07733617617, thanks
As far as the drugs are concerened i'm unsure. The tests that have been done are notespecially good and i truthful;ly haven't read up on it enough.
But... and this is a large BUT, you can't write of psychiatry because of the medicine. Most of the time therapy alone will do. The therapy works in many cases.
Basically, like you said there is no provable Hardware problem, it is a problem with the Software of the brain. This Software programming can be altered/treated using psychiatry.
Also, if there is no proof of brain chemistry changes in, say, a schizophrenia patient that does not neccessarily mean that a drug that has a known action on the brain will not help!
If someone is hallucinating, a drug that combats that will work no matter what the brain chemistry. If someone hears voices and there is a drug that has proven scientifically, with controlls, to combat that effect, it matters not whether the sounds were caused by brain chemistry. It treats the symptoms
But you do understand that an anti spazmodic will not treat MS but it will stop the horrible spasms that happen. This is just one example, i can think of many others.
There are literally thousands of diseases for which we have no idea of the causes(physical or chemical) but they are still easily treated.
Scientologists don't recognise these (or at least refuse to comment ie autism) and have a real agenda.
Sorry, as a quick PS. i'd also like to say that i personally have suffered from Iatrogenesis and it was not pleasant! It cost me a house, a partner of 8 years and 3 cars and job so i have still got something to say about prescribing drugs 'willy nilly'.
It's just that Scientologists go way too far and against scientific convention and logical reasoning and the scientific method itself in proclaiming psychiatry as bunk. It's the only way to stop their brainwashing and as a result they hate it
I agree that drugs that treat symptoms have their place and often they are all that's available for some illnesses. I only question the idea that mental illnesses are caused by chemical imbalances in the brain. I think most mental illnesses develop in response to traumatic life experiences and that's where any treatment needs to focus. I do think it's interesting what you say about Scientology needing to debunk psychiatry because their brainwashing techniques are threatened by science.
Yeh i agree. It's just that it doesn't matter really. We can study anstudy it but in the meanwhile the treatment we have is working. We will probably find better treatment in the future.
The comment RE needing to debunk psychiatry - Hubbard wrote a book called dianetics which proposed a new alternate type of therapy. When the scientific community rejected it as a pseudoscientific brainwashing manual he flew upset and decided to wage war on psychiatry.
Your video and all like seem to be focused on the wrong issues and are leading people who actually may need help, away from that help. Yes, a chemical imbalance is speculation, however the beneficial effects of the medications are tangible. Without them, I would have commit suicide long ago.
You are absolutely right. But it doesn't change the fact that true science should seek the actual causes. In ancient times doctors used to help people by experimenting - sometimes it worked, sometimes not. But such experiments were necessary to the development of medicine.
The problem with psychiatry is that it assumes the causes without any proof and also persuades people to take a treament they don't want. Nobody would be against psychiatry if it didn't want to forcefully 'cure' anyone.
"But it doesn't change the fact that true science should seek the actual causes" - I never said it should. Read what i put. I said UNTILL we find out what is going on. I said we can study and study but until then we have to treat people the best way we know how
It is I who claims that science should do that, not you. ;) So you have misinterpreted my answer rather than I misread your post.
Btw, my mother is schizophrenic, she takes drugs and I wouldn't say it helps her a lot. She does almost nothing, sleeps most of the time and when she doesn't, she is very 'touchy' and overreactive. One has to be careful what he says in her presence. She also treats other people as her tools and still have hallucinations quite often.
In other words, I have experienced myself how "helpful" psychiatry can actually be. ;]
This is the reason why I have a great reason to criticize mainstream psychiatrics' ways of dealing with sick people and their families. My father has to pay a lot of money for drugs which haven't improved our lives at all. Living with a schizophrenic is a horror but psychiatrists don't care about suffering families. All they do is prescribing expensive drugs, which do very little (if at all) 'good'.
Without the drugs you know it would be much much worse though.
My point is best described with an analogy.
Surgeons would rather spend 2 hours amputating a leg than spending 8-12 hours saving it. Yes it seems callous and yes they have become 'harden'd' by exposure but does that mean that surgery is bunk and surgeons are evil? Of course not. It's the same with psychiatrists. They become 'battle hardened' by the exposure to the mentally ill and come across as callous but they really do help
I didn't say that psychiatrists are 'evil'. What my point was that they should be much more thoughtful than just being interested in promoting some specific drugs.
Mental illness isn't only a problem of the sick individual - it's a great issue for anyone near them, especially their family. Nobody teaches us how to treat this people, how to react to them.
Besides, a statement that psychiatry isn't at all ideological is simply naive. There's a lot more than "science" to it.
Oddly enough, despite being Jewish, Freud thought that psychotic illnesses are caused by certain childhood experiences rather than physical brain diseases. As you and I do, he also didn't believe that they could be medicated away. So you agree with the Jew Freud. And you agree with me, and I am also Jewish. Resorting to racism will only divide like-minded people like you and I and we should stick together - there are few enough of us!
I thought you were a good Jew like Finkelsteing or Chomsky but well...
That explains why you try to cover the FACT that Freud promoted COCAINE use for medical conditions. He was an addict and he recommended to everyone so irresponsibly. Like his "friend" Marxlow who almost died of cocaine abuse.
Like i said before
Fuck the stupid kike Sigmund Freud and all their kind
I didn't try to cover any facts, I had no idea about Freud and cocaine but do know that many of his theories are considered wrong these days and I'm not an apologist for him. I only brought him up because you appeared to lump him in with those who believe in the chemical imbalance theory of mental illness. From what I've read he didn't, that's all. Also, didn't much that we dislike about psychiatry stem from eugenics which Hitler and the Nazis promoted? Was Alfred Ploetz Jewish?
Ok ok i thought you were an apologist of Freud, the cocaine promoter.
Chemical Imbalance its not completely wrong, people should know about neurotransmitter and hipotalamus. To correct an imbalance, people like Freud will pollute your body with drugs AKA psychiatry. The truth is that we do not need that external drugs, our hipotalamus produce all chemicals we need. All we have to do is to bring down the toxicity levels of our body and then catalyze neurotransmitters.
Fundamented observations made me created that opinion of the Jews. At first I had a positive view towards Israel ,for example, then I started digging on history.
The thing with the Jew today is that is a lonely disciplined, sensitive individual that needs to be united because of the fear of discrimination.
And unified, they dont often question on what their leaders do.
It is discriminated because in history their leaders have worked in evil ways and had such a bad reputation.
I accept your apology, thanks. When you talk about Jewish unification do you mean the Zionist agenda to create a Jewish homeland in Palestine? This has certainly been a stated reason for discrimination but a similar hatred existed long before Zionism. Jews had been persecuted for killing Jesus since the middle ages (along with other unlikely accusations such as making matzoh with infant gentile blood.) This doesn't excuse the actions of the Israeli government but is worth considering.
Drugs for depression/bipolar/schizophrenia/etc. don't work.They cause huge problems (most irreversible) in brain &nervous system.Pharma companies hide data & favor sleazy research to hide truth.Big Pharma has FDA in its pocket.Pharma, via perks/$/marketing,infiltratedUS Psychiatry,influenced Congress.Courts influenced by "experts" who believe propaganda&in$.News media not done homework. Media has no suspicion, no hunger to investigate, no scientific expertise.Pharma misleads doctors & public.
Reported: German Schoolshooter also on antidepressants.
"The teen, underwent several treatment sessions for depression at a psychiatric clinic that year, said investigator Siegfried Mahler. He showed up for five sessions between April and September, and was expected to continue outpatient therapy at a different clinic, but never began it, Mahler said."
Google: "German police suspect chat room posts were faked"
yeah and doctors used to try and bleed infections out of people......
We are a little more informed now i think.
Some people may believe psychological problems are because of a chemical imbalance or some sort of past trauma.
Others believe these problems are caused by the souls of beings from outer space (thetans) somehow getting into peoples bodies, but not to worry, removal of these thetans is an easy process. Just pay the church of scientology and they will take care of them for you.
Hopefully theres still enough thinking people not drugged into stupidity and numbness to actually see the truth.
Personally I think the plan is to get everyone on these drugs to make us docile and controllable. Thats why they have these sweeping huge programs to get all the kids on psych drugs.
Is it just about money or something more sinister? I'm not sure.
people go 2 psychiatrists bc they need HELP. some instances it does work. and some people go into see psychiatrists bc they are druggies and fake an illness to get the drugs. its the doctors job to be able to point out if they're faking. and another thing, have u ever considered that kids are on the drugs bc of their parents? in todays society the easy way out for an uncontrollable kid is having him diagnosed with ADD. parents go in, my kid has ADD boom u get pills. just slap the kid! discipline
u r right just bcuz some people abuse drugs or take the easy way out with their kids doesnt mean that psychiatry doestn work, yeah its true that they screwed holes in people's brain but psychiatry has come a long way
I am really having a ball seeing all you pro-psychiatry goons thinking that everyone speaking out against the cult of psychiatry must be a Scientologist.
I think its an excellent example of self-inflicted paranoia.
The Only thing that is wrong with psychiatry is wel, huh, Psychiatry!
Here is an example on Dr. Joseph Biederman, a leading psychiatric researcher.
Currently the American Association of Psychiatry is under congressional investigation.
In early June 2008 it was reported to the US Congress that Dr. JOSEPH BIEDERMAN, a renowned child psychiatrist at Harvard Medical School, had earned at least $1.6 million in undisclosed frees from Big Parma between 2000 and 2007.
Now, Dr. JOSEPH BIEDERMAN is one of the world's most influential researchers in child psychiatry
He is widely admired for focusing the fields attention on its most troubled
"young patients".
Anywaysit was Dr. Biederman who spread far and wide the conviction that the emotional roller coaster of bipolar disorder can start "from the moment the child opened his eyes" at birth.
Youtube: drugging children & Yoism
Anyway, historically, psychiatrists used to regard bipolar disorder as a disease that begins in young adulthood, but now some diagnose it in children scarcely out of diapers.
Treating them with powerful antipsychotic medications based on Biederman's work.
Currently, There is about 2 million children on antipsychotics in the US, and I guess you could call that the result of Dr. Biederman his work.
I have 2 questions for you here:
1) Would you entrust your 4 year old kid to be put on powerful antipsychotic medications because some psychiatrists or GP claims that he is bi-polar?, because of the psychiatric opinion originated by Dr. J Biebermann?
He unlawfully earned more than 1.6 million from the pharmaceutical industry?
If your answer is yes, you should know that Dr. Biederman: The world-famous Bi-polar expert, who sold the idea of Bi-polar disorders in millions of children, his career is done and over with.
He will be fired from Harvard University were he was doing his bogus research from as he broke federal law accepting the funds he got from the Pharmaceutical industry.
This will discredit his junk-science convictions regarding bipolar disorder in kids and toddlers, as far as there was any science to begin with.
2) What do Scientologist have to do with the fact that psychiatry, when you take a hard and honest look at it, is nothing but junk science?
Is it the fault of scientologist that leading psychiatrists like Dr. Biedermann enrich themselves over the backs of innocent kids with all sort of bogus claims that have no scientific validation whatsoever?
Resulting in the world now believing that the emotional roller coaster of bipolar disorder can start "from the moment the child opened his eyes" at birth? Just as Biedermann Preached?
I call it the $1.6 million dollar J. Biedermann lie.
Here is a recent New York Times article that gives you more info on how leading research psychiatrists are bought and paid for by Big Parma, maybe you read it before you answer.
If you believe Aliens control psychiatrist and psychologist then yes you are as loopy as TC.
The debate may be good as Medicine side effects need to be monitored and it is up to the consumer to report them to their Doctors.
Unfortunately the poor get pushed aside on this issue and their voice is not as strong as those who have the cash to change to medicines that don't have as many or any side effects. Because of this, side effects are reported more often, then not.
I would also like to add that interestingly enough there has been clinical studies which have shown that a small hippocampus is associated with my disorder and that taking paxil causes neurogenes in the hippocampus and alleviates the symptoms. Thus further proof that my disorder is biological. Look this up on pubmed com: Long-term treatment with paroxetine increases verbal declarative memory and hippocampal volume in posttraumatic stress disorder.
For some reason my previous comment did not post. I pretty much stated that I have been suffering from an anxiety disorder since I was a teen. For the longest time I tried counseling and used shear will to attempt to get better. I didnt like the idea of having to take psychiatric medications, because in my mind at that time only crazy people use psych drugs. Shear will and counseling didnt work for me. Lexapro is what worked for me and this proved to me that my disorder is biological.
You have a pretty narrow view of the issue. Counseling IS often crap. And often it takes a lot more than just 'getting over it' or ' sheer will'. It takes a whole change of mindset. I completely got over my anxiety and depression. The placebo effect is more than just 'thinking it will work', its also 'hoping it will work', and 'thinking it is working' when you feel a difference in your body because of the drug.
Ok well that is your opinion. From the way you talk about the mind, it seems like you think that the mind is not a byproduct of the brain. This is where me and you differ. I think every thought that comes out of your mind and my mind is the product of the biochemical interactions of neurons within our brain. Are you an undergraduate student?
Everything is technically opinion, how valid an opinion is in something more unknown (such as with the 'social sciences') depends on logic and reasoning. Of course the mind is technically related to the brain, but its more than the state of the brain is a byproduct of the environment. We're not evolved much more than 5,000 years ago, but our environment has changed a ton. To say that extreme emotional reactions are biological because they have a biological manifestation seems pretty silly.
Which of course means that basic parts of the brain are innate, but our complex psychological systems are primarily environmental (though indirectly influenced by genetics of basic personality perhaps). This is why these studies are so inconclusive. We don't understand enough about the subject to assume that association means anything more than indirect correlation, which again, is meaningless.
No the finding were not an indirect correlation. The finding are not an indirect correlation because in the control group there was no neurogenesis, while in the experimental group there was. The absence of neurogenesis in the control group which recieved placebo shows that the use of parexatine is the independent factor. The depent factor was neurogenesis in the hippocampus which depended on parexatine. Thus the physical change in the brain was a result of the use of the parexatine.
I looked at the study again, and it doesn't seem like any of that is there. Yet you're assuming all of this because it is just 'good science'. Either way, double blind studies in this area can be too easily violated because of the absence of enhanced placebo and other factors. They said quote "Based on animal studies, stress is associated with damage to the hippocampus". This is vague. Add in the fact that the study is small with some dropping out and you really don't have much. Stop assuming.
How do you think a psychological system changes from interactions with the enviroment. Does the mind change without there being changes in the brain? As a biology major I have been taught that enviromental variation causes genes to be turned on and off in cells which causes cells, tissues and organs to compensate for enviromental variation. The mind which is a byproduct of the brain would change when there is changes in gene regulation.
Did you even read what I said? Of course technically, everything emotional is related to the brain. But if you can change these 'brain' things by changing the environment when the environment fucked it up in the first place, why is it even relevant. You're describing the mechanisms of manifestations in the physical brain, which have nothing to do with the cause of solution to the problem.
The entire range of human behavior is the byproduct of the brain. All the complex psychological systems you speak of, are the by product of the brain. There is no behavior or emotion that is not rooted in the brain. There is no behavior that is rooted in the heart or in your colon. The human body is a complex biological machine. Every motion, breath, thought you make is all biologically rooted. This is what I have learned as a biology major. Are you an undergraduate? perhaps a psychology major?
Technically everything has a biological manifestation, but if the cause is not biological, biology is wholly irrelevant. You seem to be misunderstanding what I'm saying.
Of course we know (at least to some degree) the MECHANISM of the drug, but I see no reason to draw a conclusion that it 'alleviates the symptoms'. 'Improvement' is nearly impossible to gauge with current 'techniques' and the placebo effect can easily play a major role. You again point to correlations as some kind of 'proof' that the disorder is biological. Correlations are meaningless and there are many, many ways this can easily be so. Basically, your study doesn't say anything about causation.
Ok maybe my personal experience is a correlation. I cant prove empiracly that my improvement was to taking the medication alone. But the clinical study shows that there is a physical change in the brain, after treatment. Does this paper publication imply this is the sole causation of the disease; no it does not. This study just showed that there is a structural change in the brain before and after treatment which was ASSOCIATED with peroxetine treatment.
The physical change in the brain isn't necessarily because of the drug, and doesnt necessarily translate to 'improvement'. That's the problem. Association is meaningless.
When someone takes mood altering drugs, of the non-prescribed kind, and is happier for awhile, people don't tend to say that its 'helping' them or 'benefiting' them. So I don't see why it would be any different for another 'mood altering drug'. And this is WITHOUT the reality that there's no objective evidence of benefit (due to a host of reasons, one being that 'benefit' is a weasel word in these clinical trials), and that the placebo effect is huge.
What's your point? If any meds work, whether OTC or RX, they will be used. They are all tested against the placebo (and other drugs), of course, so if they alleviate psychiatric symptoms and are agree-able with patients, the adverse effects and drug interaction profiles are weighed against it to determine the OTC or Rx med's usefulness. If you think the field of psychology is fundamentally unable to tell if a patient has improved outcome, then just maybe "benefit" is the right term. Get it?
My point is 1) they don't really 'work' and 2) since this chemical imbalance crap is bull, they're no better than any other mood altering drug. If they were just honest when prescribing them and said it was just a mood altering agent which would numb you up, I doubt so many people would take them.
And no, benefit is not a satisfactory term, because that is also a weasel word.
You cant compare taking extasy or smoking crack cocaine or any other illegal drug to psychiatric medications. For one a lot of illegal drugs cause brain damage, while for example antidepressants have been seen to
initiat neurogenesis in PTSD patients. When a drug is going to be used therapeutically, you have to weigh the benefits with the costs. Sure some of the side effects suck such as sexual side effects and weight gain, however if the medication makes symptoms subside then it is worth it.
And neuroleptic drugs can cause Parkinsonism or tardive dyskinesia. Weight gain, we are told, can kill people. The evidence for illegal drugs causing permanent brain damage is in many cases inconclusive.
Drugs are bad if used irresponsibly. The worst is probably alcohol. Do anything to excess and it's likely to cause measurable problems - drink enough coffee and you'll die of caffeine poisoning. The evidence for brain damage from regular prescribed dosages of neuroleptics is powerful and even psychiatrists don't dispute it - they just say it's an unfortunate side-effect of otherwise good medicine.
Secondly, if you have this little faith in science from the bench to the clinic, then you must also have a mistrust of the field of psychology, which has always (along with psychiatry) faced an "eye of the beholder" problem because they are (in part) BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES. Thirdly, I'd like to ask that you don't spread disinformation on the internet. Fox News is bad enough on TV; There's no need for an even worse distortion on the net aimed at using propaganda and fear to promote another cause.
OK, as an MD, I feel obligated to post. What you and Mr. Cruise both do not understand is that whether or not someone with depression has what you keep calling a "chemical imbalance," doesn't mean that drugs designed to alter neurotransmission are not working to benefit people with psychological disorders. No...we will probably never find a brain scan that can undeniably show that a depressed brain is a not a brain without depressive symptoms, but this isn't the crux of the matter either.
It doesn't completely, by itself, stop the 'possibility' of it, but it makes them far less credible since they claim that their drugs treat 'chemical imbalances'. And also, few deny that these drugs have effects. However, if they don't 'treat' a specific 'chemical imbalance', that means that they're just another mood altering drug, which puts it in the realm of other mood altering drugs.
Sure, marijuana and cocaine are mood altering drugs, so if you want to put them in the same "realm" as antidepressants or even steroids, then that's fine. And we don't know if there's an actual "imbalance." This is suggested (inferred from lesion studies, genetics, and bench science), but we know where the drugs are working just as we know where cocaine and heroin work. However, cocaine and heroin have extremely limited clinical usage. They are far cries from each other.
In addition to that, someone who has their emotions fucked with will have a harder time figuring themselves out. It's not really 'suggested' at all, and I'd say that the majority of psychiatry backers say that its 'proven'. Of course extreme drugs aren't really useful as 'treatment' options, but neither are psychiatric drugs. Psych drugs don't yield a crazy high, but they do have something in common with those drugs, which is extreme withdrawal effects.
I'm not against people using any drugs to wash the pain away temporarily, people should have the right to do whatever they want, but to say that these drugs are objectively helpful like a lot of doctors who prescribe them do, or that they treat some chemical imbalance, ignoring the withdrawal effects and side effects, and on top of this acting as though people have 'biological diseases requiring treatment'....well thats all uninformed consent.
This guy is a SCIENTOLIGIST pretending to be a non scientologist.
One thing that you are wrong about is that there is physical finding on schizophrenia. For one there is something called ventricles in the brain which are larger in schizophrenics. Secondly there have been pet scans which show there is a difference in concentrations of dopamine in shizophrenics. The reason from what I understand that all suspected shizophrenics dont get these tests is because they are expensive.
How is that irrevelant? These are physical finding that are localized in the schizophrenic population. Also I would like to point out that antipsychotics reduce the high amount of dopamine in the brain, which is followed by the resolution of psychotic symptoms. The high amount of dopamine in schizophrenics through pet scans and the reduction of dopamine through the use of antipsychotics implicates that dopamine is a neurotransmitter that plays a role in psychosis.
It is irrelevant because correlation =/= causation. Just because you find something in the brain doesn't mean it 'caused' the problem, it means its just correlated with it. Which is entirely meaningless.
Sure, antipsychotics reduce dopamine, which reduces symptoms. That's meaningless too. You dull a person's entire brain, their symptoms of a complex emotional problem fade because their entire brain is dulled. 'Plays a role' is a meaningless pithy statement, too.
And that's neglecting the fact that many of these 'brain scans' are after drugging/ECT has taken place. But that's not even necessary to point out because it's well documented that brain plasticity applies to many things, the only reason it hasn't been applied to 'mental disorders' is because of bias in the 'medical research' field, specifically psychiatry.
The post above this is disinformation. Concerning the post above that one, you mean to say associated, not correlated, which proves your point further. But...Associations are just clues and stepping stones to finding an answer. However, the drugs are used because they can possibly improve a patient's quality of life despite having side effects. Yet I think you're wanting to make medicine into a problem-solution profession more likened to repair work, but it is not anywhere near that simple.
I meant to say correlated, because that's what it is...but I suppose you could use association as well. My point is that the drugs are used because they're profitable and give people hope for a quick fix when there really is none. Depends what you mean 'improve the quality of life'. Suppress symptoms through suppressing the whole brain, sure, maybe making that person more docile and easy to deal with, but its not actually solving the problem.
Now thats just outright wrong dude. In clinical studies you have to have a control. Its not that hard to petscan someone right before giving them medication in order for that patient to serve as a control. Also a petscan is a diagnostic tool, meaning that its used to assist the physician make a diagnoses. Pet Scans are usually taken after being medicated when the patient is in a clinical study.
Not always. Often in these studies these people have a 'history' of long term psychiatric drug use even if they're not necessarily using it at the time. If you're talking about gauging the brain effects of a drug, then sure. But since the biological brain is only the manifestation of the environment (to a large degree), I'm not sure why it's relevant.
No its not entire meaningless. Its one of the factors that is associated with psychosis. Of course its not the only factor. There is a multitude of factors such as enviromental factors and gentics. However to say dopamine levels is irrelevant in psychosis studies which is seen in a large number of patients is just not smart science.
This isn't about science at all. Science is irrelevant. There will obviously be biological manifestations of psychological problems because the brain is a biological entity, but they're irrelevant because the brain changes to the ENVIRONMENT. So it's the environment/psychological state that is the problem, not some 'broken brain'.
The pet scan evidence I can find is derived from from "meta-analysis" of old data. "this meta-analysis revealed a small (12 percent) but significant elevation of striatal D2 receptors in untreated patients with schizophrenia. No clinical correlates of increased D2 receptor binding parameters could be identified." The report concludes "Imaging studies of D1 receptors have consistently failed to detect abnormalities of D1 receptor availability in the striatum of patients with schizophrenia"
I am so completely NOT a Scientologist! Would a scientologist admit to smoking cannabis as a medicine? Check out my video response above.
These tests you talk about are far from confirmed as clinically significant. This is the conclusion of a recent study into ventricle size and schizophrenia: "results suggest that genetics have a stronger influence on the shape of lateral ventricles than do the disease-related changes in schizophrenia."
So why did you post the same comment you posted 2 days ago? Ok fine your not a scientologist. I get it. Dude all these studies you talk about are meaningless if I cant read them. Give me an ISSN number of the study or the exact title and what journal the study is in. I would be very interested in reading those publications.
I posted the same reply because it didn't appear as a reply to your comment the first time so I thought you might not have seen it.
The study I'm referring to was published in PNAS and is titled "Morphometric analysis of lateral ventricles in schizophrenia and healthy controls regarding genetic and disease-specific factors". Published online before print March 16, 2005, doi: 10.1073/pnas.0501117102 PNAS March 29, 2005 vol. 102 no. 13 4872-4877
enjoyed the vid, thanks very much. for your own interest, try looking up the "monoamine hypothesis" for depression and the dexamethasone suppression test for depression. btw, there are plenty of medical diagnoses such as carpal tunnel syndrome, alzhemier's disease (neurological), appendicitis (you have to perform the treatment -surgery - before you even know if this person has appendicitis), etc that dont have black-and-white tests. clinical evidence and trials speak louder than blood tests.
In short, I want to tell you is that psychiatry, for all its claims, belongs in the same class as a Religion or a Cult, just as scientology, Christianity or Confucianism and such
As far as Psychiatry being willing to be open about its research and has codes
goolge:
Investigation of Glaxo's Paxil widens: paper
A recent article from Reuters, it seems that GlaxoSmithKline has withheld suicide information on Paxil and there are voices now in the US to launch a congressional investigation.
Zyprexa: Google: Disparity Emerges in Lilly Data on Schizophrenia Drug
Illy lilly hides the fact that their blockbuster anti-psychotic zyprexa can cause diabetes. Fined to pay out 1.2 billion to settle the lawsuits. Hundreds of thousands of children have been on this drug. Kids diagnosed with Difficult behaviour and made up ADHD.
Should I go on why you can't drug up people without hard scientific evidence?
A February 2008 study found that, compared with placebo, the new-generation antidepressants DO NOT PRODUCE CLINICALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENTS in depression in patients who initially have moderate or even very severe depression, but show significant effects only in the most severely depressed patients.
Why was this study done? Because "some doubts" remained about the clinical efficacy of these anti-depressants. (and given the results I'd say that this was well justified)
Most people who take those drugs aren't "severely" depressed, I'm sure you know this, so why bring up the argument of "schizophrenia", as usual.
The researchers of this paper obtained data on all the clinical trials submitted to the FDA for the licensing of fluoxetine (prozac), venlafaxine (effexor), nefazodone, and paroxetine (paxil) + the negative studies that had been deliberately LEFT OUT
Again: The overall effect of new generation antidepressants is BELOW the recommended criteria for CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE. There was almost no difference in the improvement for drug and placebo in patients with moderate depression and only a SMALL AND CLINICALLY INSIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE AMONG PATIENTS WITH VERY SEVERE DEPRESSION
I agree with you on the fact that most medications screw around with you before you find the right one. However, some psychiatrists do actually know what they are practicing. Mental illness has always existed, it is just receiving more light now as it has always been kicked to the side. They can be traced through biological, environmental or psychological factors. By 2020, major depressive illness will be the leading cause of disability in the world for women and children. Research more.
The symptoms that are called mental illness have always existed but the concept of biological origin is a relatively recent one. In the past and in other cultures the symptoms have been thought to have spiritual causes. Why do you think major depressive illness is rising so fast? Is there a biological cause or are people feeling increasingly hopeless in a world where emotions are considered unimportant compared with running in the rat race?
Mental Illnesses are NOT symptoms. Fact! Studies prove mental illnesses are caused by physical, social, environmental, psychological causes. This has been proven, many times. In 2020 it's est. that depressive illnesses will become the second leading cause of disease burden worldwide. We need doctors and psychologists to help. With people like you, who say psychiatrists are useless and mental illness are symptoms, no wonder people give up.
Why do you think major depressive illness is rising so fast? Is it perhaps that people are feeling increasingly lost and confused in our emotionless and spiritually lacking culture? A better cure might be to bring some love and compassion into our world not just to medicate people until they don't care any more. But that wouldn't be cost effective.
Well, if you think that someone who can walk on water, raise the dead, feed the 5000 with just a handful of fishes and a couple of loaves of bread, would be locked up today as being a loon...I think you have seriously lost your argument mate! Before you start spouting of about religion. Try reading the Bible, the Qu'ran, the Tora for starters. then maybe I will take you seriously. I have & thats is why I know you are talking bollocks!
Are you saying that you think a modern psychiatrist would believe those stories? He'd listen, take into account that the patient was hearing the voice of the devil telling him to kill himself and then lock him up - for his own protection. The equivalent authorities of the time were the Romans and they crucified him! Why do you assume that I haven't read those books?
You really believe that, even though the only evidence we have is that the religious and secular authorities of the time argued with it? Popularity or even being the son of God wouldn't interfere with a modern medical diagnosis - how could they?. Psychiatrists would have to regard auditory hallucinations as signs of a chemical imbalance as they have no other explanation for them.
Okay. Personally, I believe that mental illness is on the rise because of many causes. The fact that we have people going around who don't know what to do with themselves. There are emotions in this world. Perhaps, if everyone just looked a little harder, they would find that there are emotions and spirituality still flowing throughout the world. And cost effective? What would be more cost effective? Not being here at all.
ok, good. now, the only trouble with this definition is it's very general. what i mean is that, per this definition, every religion fits it. wouls you say that all religions are "cults"? if not, look deeper.
cult • noun 1 a system of religious worship directed towards a particular figure or object. 2 a small religious group regarded as strange or as imposing excessive control over members. 3 something popular or fashionable among a particular section of society. — DERIVATIVES cultish adjective cultist noun. — ORIGIN Latin cultus 'worship'.
very good. oxford is better, though this is stl general, but look. the word cult derives from meaning worship. scientology does not employ worship as one of its tenets. we don't worship. so up to now, all religions APART FROM SCIENTOLOGY can be defined as "cults". i don't think that islam is a cult, or christianity, or any other of the major religions so is there further definition?
Not enough space on comments field. To answer that one I need to send you an email....But you have blocked your profile to me....Up to you on that one!
No..Only those like Scientology who refuse point blank to tell the origins of their "religion". If I ask that question to a legitimate religion they will tell freely and honestly...CO$ does not...So come on then tell me?
Scientology is not a religion. In fact it's not even a science! It's nothing more than a pyramid sales scheme dressed up to look like a religion. Hubbard was a despicable individual who tortured his second wife, kidnapped his child, was a drug addict and a paranoid schizophrenic. I feel sorry for anyone who is gullible enough to follow his teachings. Co$ destroys families and goes out of the way to destroy its critics.
What sort of person in their right mind would ever want to be part of such an insidious cult like Scientology? The Co$ use mind control techniques and the Co$ teachings actually damages health. There is nothing about the Co$ that is remotely likeable! The quicker this disgusting cult is shut down the better! I feel sorry for you if you can not see that tylerrotty. How many of your love ones have you disconnected from in the name of this cult?
in answer to your question i have disconnected from no family. there is nothing in scientology on disconnecting from family. it is something that is avoided. so, can you not answer my question, why are you terrified of scientology? the troublw with your comments on LRH and scientology is that they are baseless. why are you so terrified it? in answering please note that i am being perfectly civil and am making no attempt to block you, despite your claims of my religion so keep it rational please.
My comments on Hubbard and Scientology are from baseless tylerrotty. Unlike you, I am willing to go and search for the truth. Like most Scientologist you only believe what the Co$ want you to believe. Everything I said about Hubbard is true. Go and read the affidavit from his second wife. Go read up on operation Snow white and the list goes on and on!!!!
On top of which. If you really believe that the Heterosexual actor Tom Cruise has read all the evidence then you are an idiot! There are millions of books on Psychiatry and he reckons he has read them all? Give me a break! Psychiatry cures people...Scientology doesn't! Psychiatrists spend years studying real data by real scientists. Scientologist make theirs up! Psychiatry has been around since 5BC and was not invented by the Nazi's!!!
i see. so you can't read i see, as this non-sequitur response is completely random and pertains, factually, to nothing. shame. get in touch with "Applied Scholastics" as they can help you to be able to read and learn. if you're lucky the psychs won't get you, although you apparently agree with their practises.
You really are spoon fed aren't you! I see you refuse to go and look for the evidence. How typical of a Scientologist!
The Affidavit from Hubbard's 2nd wife has all the evidence about him and his mental illness, his drug addiction, the torture he committed on her and the fact that he kidnapped their child.
Why are you afraid to read the affidavit and why are afraid to read about operation Snow White?
You are simply relaying what you read on the internet. That is poor research. As a legal researcher I know none of your familiar repetitions are sound. Scn. is a religion per the Eu court of Human rights 2007. Also in 2007 Caberta failed to provide any evidence after 10 years to support a ban. If you must make criticisms, do this objectively examining all angles to obtain a fair balance. The internet is an information highway containing a wealth of data but also heaps of garbage.
I see you are so worried about the truth of my comments that you have blocked me tylerrotty! So typical of a Scientologist to try and block out the truth. I hope you can finally see the truth about the evils of Scientology before it is to late for you tylerrotty.
I tried answering your email, but I see you have still blocked my replies, but I see you are still frightened of me answering. If you unblocked me and was truly open to debate like you say then I will happily answer your questions. Balls in your court. I can give the answer you want or you can continue keeping your head in your sand...What's it to be?
I can't find your e-mail which is factually wrong. Scientology is not banned in Germany you clown. The Charities commission did not call it a cult and have no legal power to do so. Did you read what they actually said?
A Psycyhiatrist does not speak of cures. Go and ask a psychiatrist how many people they have cured. They will sometimes laugh They speak of treating. Do you have a reference of psychiatry curing anything?
5BC? Wow, that's a long time to research an illness and still not find the cause! Over 2000 years and still not even one physical test to see if someone is ill or better. Talking of history, Christianity was considered a dangerous cult by the Roman Empire for nearly three hundred years after its founder, a bully and torturer, started it. Watch out!!!
Jesus didn't found a religion; he was Jewish. Paul was the founder of Christianity and he had formally worked for the Romans persecuting the followers of Jesus. That was until his conversion on the road to Damascus.
WRONG! Jesus was and is the basis of Christianity! Before Paul came along...Which was nearly 30 years after the death of Jesus. Jesus's Brother James and Jesus's Apostles were already spreading the word of Christ. Paul started the Catholic church...Not Christianity!
Ok, I've clearly hit a nerve there! Let's just agree that there is scholarly debate about the question. How about this one though: If Jesus were around today he would very likely be diagnosed as schizophrenic, sectioned and forced to take anti-psychotics. Modern psychiatry has no other explanation for his behaviour except as the result of a mental illness.
fear doesn't come in to blocking you. you're with anonymous, and by that i mean you support their acions. your irrational views are based on nothing more than fantasy. as for having known these OT's, why do you not still know them? to be honest i'm not interested in you as this line of antagonism is just boring. i know why people fear scientology. it's their own acts that they wish not be uncovered. i have one piece of advice, clear the definition of "cult" as you have a misunderstood there.
3 committed suicide, 1 had a complete psychotic episode (1 of the OT4's!)and got locked away, 1 went travelling around the world and we lost contact, 1 died in the first gulf war and the other turned out to be complete idiot and they disconnected from all their friends and family.
I am not with anon...that is why I use my real name on my profile.
Co$ is a cult and I will not change my opinion unless proven otherwise!
1: formal religious veneration : worship2: a system of religious beliefs and ritual; also : its body of adherents3: a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its body of adherents4: a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator
Can you tell me why psychiatry is not a cult, because when it comes to mental illness there is no scientific test for any mental illness, so it basically comes down to the opinion of the psychiatrist. Ad on top of that that it is unknown how anti-depresseants work (as you can read on the information leavlets), one can't even scientifically show when a cure is effected other then taking the pasient his word for it, again unscientific
A person saying he feels better is not scientific validation
I'll answer your questions when you answer mine......How long have you been a Scientologist? The fact that you refuse to answer tells me that you are a $cilon. I've answered you 1st question. Now do me the same courtesy...How long have you been a Scientologist?
I didn't respond to you straigth away because you didn't answer my question but tried to side-track the subject we are discussing here: if psychiatry is pseudo-science or not.
This is not a vid on scientology, we can talk about that later if you want.
I also tell you some comments below why I do see psychiatry as a cult.
Please read and comment back on that and stay on point.
Some manners wouldn't go a miss Hasstradamus! Try please and thank you rather than making demands. I personally don't feel that psychiatry is psuedo-science. Scientology on the hand is a cult and is definitely a psuedo-science as well as crimes against humanity. The way you attack with your writing told me straight away you are $cilon. If you want to discuss, then talk to me and not at me. If you want to talk, then please send me a pm...Happy to discuss.
Good video.
You mention mental illnesses, but not a specific illness.
In my case, it is an illness, and although I didn't get a brain scan to be diagnosed, it's fairly obvious I have an illness.
And I feel tons better with the pills.
Chemical imbalance? Isn't that more of a pop-psychology term? It's never been described to much as that by a psychiatrist. Depression is an illness where low serotonin is found. The drugs help me retain serotonin.
Fairly simple.
anobody911 2 years ago
Surprisingly, chemical imbalance is a proper medical term and is generally believed to be causative in most mental illnesses. The problem with depression is that nobody has established if low serotonin causes depression or if depression causes low serotonin. Either way, drugs that influence serotonin levels will change mood but that's also why taking Ecstasy makes people feel good. It's just that the pills you're on a better balanced so as not to overstimulate serotonin production.
tearecords 2 years ago
The information I get with the pills has always stated that it's not exactly clear how the pills work.
But that's true with a lot of things. So many medications were actually intended for something else altogether.
Serotonin can also be produced by eating certain foods, and also excercise. However you probably won't be able to focus on either of these things with severe depression, so the pills are a kickstart.
anobody911 2 years ago
It's true you need something to break the cycle and I'm glad it's working for you.
tearecords 2 years ago
Brain scans have shown larger empty spaces in the brains of Schizophrenics than in normal controls. Also brain shrinkage has been measured in bipolar patients. These aren't tests they are proof that these conditions exist. I was extremely ill before diagnosis and treatment and I know too many people who are Schizophrenic and bipolar who suffer greatly without the help of psychiatry.
updownjunkie 2 years ago
look mate i have been searching the net about this subject, i would enjoy to be able to talk to you over the phone about this subject, please get in touch with me, thanks my name is micky bolton and my number is 07733617617, thanks
kingv855 2 years ago
As far as the drugs are concerened i'm unsure. The tests that have been done are notespecially good and i truthful;ly haven't read up on it enough.
But... and this is a large BUT, you can't write of psychiatry because of the medicine. Most of the time therapy alone will do. The therapy works in many cases.
Basically, like you said there is no provable Hardware problem, it is a problem with the Software of the brain. This Software programming can be altered/treated using psychiatry.
seansalvador1 2 years ago
Also, if there is no proof of brain chemistry changes in, say, a schizophrenia patient that does not neccessarily mean that a drug that has a known action on the brain will not help!
If someone is hallucinating, a drug that combats that will work no matter what the brain chemistry. If someone hears voices and there is a drug that has proven scientifically, with controlls, to combat that effect, it matters not whether the sounds were caused by brain chemistry. It treats the symptoms
seansalvador1 2 years ago
As someone with MS you should know that drugs that treat symptoms but not the illness are still very usefull. My mother would be dead without them...
seansalvador1 2 years ago
Sorry all my comments are backwards ;)
But you do understand that an anti spazmodic will not treat MS but it will stop the horrible spasms that happen. This is just one example, i can think of many others.
There are literally thousands of diseases for which we have no idea of the causes(physical or chemical) but they are still easily treated.
Scientologists don't recognise these (or at least refuse to comment ie autism) and have a real agenda.
Just have a look on Pubmed at drug trials etc.
seansalvador1 2 years ago
Sorry, as a quick PS. i'd also like to say that i personally have suffered from Iatrogenesis and it was not pleasant! It cost me a house, a partner of 8 years and 3 cars and job so i have still got something to say about prescribing drugs 'willy nilly'.
It's just that Scientologists go way too far and against scientific convention and logical reasoning and the scientific method itself in proclaiming psychiatry as bunk. It's the only way to stop their brainwashing and as a result they hate it
seansalvador1 2 years ago
I agree that drugs that treat symptoms have their place and often they are all that's available for some illnesses. I only question the idea that mental illnesses are caused by chemical imbalances in the brain. I think most mental illnesses develop in response to traumatic life experiences and that's where any treatment needs to focus. I do think it's interesting what you say about Scientology needing to debunk psychiatry because their brainwashing techniques are threatened by science.
tearecords 2 years ago
Yeh i agree. It's just that it doesn't matter really. We can study anstudy it but in the meanwhile the treatment we have is working. We will probably find better treatment in the future.
The comment RE needing to debunk psychiatry - Hubbard wrote a book called dianetics which proposed a new alternate type of therapy. When the scientific community rejected it as a pseudoscientific brainwashing manual he flew upset and decided to wage war on psychiatry.
seansalvador1 2 years ago
It gets scary about 4mins 45 in!
I mean, like you said, there may even be a valid point in there but is this the way to go about it?
I'm sure that there are many suicides and murders of and by mental patients directly due to this 'bad science' hate campaign.
It is the sheer pride he seems to take (and all scientologists seem to sound just like him) in this hate campiagn!
Things like this really do scare me
seansalvador1 2 years ago
Did you delete my link to Miscavige?
Are you a scientologist?
seansalvador1 2 years ago
watch?v=OMWv0xgZsPE&feature=related
seansalvador1 2 years ago
Your video and all like seem to be focused on the wrong issues and are leading people who actually may need help, away from that help. Yes, a chemical imbalance is speculation, however the beneficial effects of the medications are tangible. Without them, I would have commit suicide long ago.
eurisko67 2 years ago
You are absolutely right. But it doesn't change the fact that true science should seek the actual causes. In ancient times doctors used to help people by experimenting - sometimes it worked, sometimes not. But such experiments were necessary to the development of medicine.
The problem with psychiatry is that it assumes the causes without any proof and also persuades people to take a treament they don't want. Nobody would be against psychiatry if it didn't want to forcefully 'cure' anyone.
asmodeus585 2 years ago
"But it doesn't change the fact that true science should seek the actual causes" - I never said it should. Read what i put. I said UNTILL we find out what is going on. I said we can study and study but until then we have to treat people the best way we know how
seansalvador1 2 years ago
It is I who claims that science should do that, not you. ;) So you have misinterpreted my answer rather than I misread your post.
Btw, my mother is schizophrenic, she takes drugs and I wouldn't say it helps her a lot. She does almost nothing, sleeps most of the time and when she doesn't, she is very 'touchy' and overreactive. One has to be careful what he says in her presence. She also treats other people as her tools and still have hallucinations quite often.
asmodeus585 2 years ago
In other words, I have experienced myself how "helpful" psychiatry can actually be. ;]
This is the reason why I have a great reason to criticize mainstream psychiatrics' ways of dealing with sick people and their families. My father has to pay a lot of money for drugs which haven't improved our lives at all. Living with a schizophrenic is a horror but psychiatrists don't care about suffering families. All they do is prescribing expensive drugs, which do very little (if at all) 'good'.
asmodeus585 2 years ago
Without the drugs you know it would be much much worse though.
My point is best described with an analogy.
Surgeons would rather spend 2 hours amputating a leg than spending 8-12 hours saving it. Yes it seems callous and yes they have become 'harden'd' by exposure but does that mean that surgery is bunk and surgeons are evil? Of course not. It's the same with psychiatrists. They become 'battle hardened' by the exposure to the mentally ill and come across as callous but they really do help
seansalvador1 2 years ago
I didn't say that psychiatrists are 'evil'. What my point was that they should be much more thoughtful than just being interested in promoting some specific drugs.
Mental illness isn't only a problem of the sick individual - it's a great issue for anyone near them, especially their family. Nobody teaches us how to treat this people, how to react to them.
Besides, a statement that psychiatry isn't at all ideological is simply naive. There's a lot more than "science" to it.
asmodeus585 2 years ago
Well said. Thanks for putting this on.
Psychiatry should be made a criminal offence.
Isisbridge 2 years ago
Errr????
What you talking about?
Qualify that statement
seansalvador1 2 years ago
Bless you for this video my friend
I was surprised about that same public "guy on the spotlight" taking about something smart people that care, already know.
Psychiatry is another of the big JEWISH lies
to pollute all the other population.
Fuck the stupid kike Sigmund Freud and all their kind
I am not a scientologist and certainly dont care about celebrities but god bless Tom Cruise for speaking some truth.
bananito2 2 years ago
Oddly enough, despite being Jewish, Freud thought that psychotic illnesses are caused by certain childhood experiences rather than physical brain diseases. As you and I do, he also didn't believe that they could be medicated away. So you agree with the Jew Freud. And you agree with me, and I am also Jewish. Resorting to racism will only divide like-minded people like you and I and we should stick together - there are few enough of us!
tearecords 2 years ago
yeah thats what i thought
you look jewish
I thought you were a good Jew like Finkelsteing or Chomsky but well...
That explains why you try to cover the FACT that Freud promoted COCAINE use for medical conditions. He was an addict and he recommended to everyone so irresponsibly. Like his "friend" Marxlow who almost died of cocaine abuse.
Like i said before
Fuck the stupid kike Sigmund Freud and all their kind
bananito2 2 years ago
I didn't try to cover any facts, I had no idea about Freud and cocaine but do know that many of his theories are considered wrong these days and I'm not an apologist for him. I only brought him up because you appeared to lump him in with those who believe in the chemical imbalance theory of mental illness. From what I've read he didn't, that's all. Also, didn't much that we dislike about psychiatry stem from eugenics which Hitler and the Nazis promoted? Was Alfred Ploetz Jewish?
tearecords 2 years ago
Ok ok i thought you were an apologist of Freud, the cocaine promoter.
Chemical Imbalance its not completely wrong, people should know about neurotransmitter and hipotalamus. To correct an imbalance, people like Freud will pollute your body with drugs AKA psychiatry. The truth is that we do not need that external drugs, our hipotalamus produce all chemicals we need. All we have to do is to bring down the toxicity levels of our body and then catalyze neurotransmitters.
bananito2 2 years ago
That's the most sensible thing anyone has commented so far. I just wish you'd drop the whole Jew hating thing, it's so last century.
tearecords 2 years ago
Fundamented observations made me created that opinion of the Jews. At first I had a positive view towards Israel ,for example, then I started digging on history.
The thing with the Jew today is that is a lonely disciplined, sensitive individual that needs to be united because of the fear of discrimination.
And unified, they dont often question on what their leaders do.
It is discriminated because in history their leaders have worked in evil ways and had such a bad reputation.
bananito2 2 years ago
So the question is sort of chicken or the egg:
Jewish unification is because of the direct discrimination they face?
or
had discrimination been brought up by Jew corrupted leaders to Jewish population for Jewish unification?
Anyway I know you felt some sort of aggression with my first cmt, and i apologize for that.
bananito2 2 years ago
I accept your apology, thanks. When you talk about Jewish unification do you mean the Zionist agenda to create a Jewish homeland in Palestine? This has certainly been a stated reason for discrimination but a similar hatred existed long before Zionism. Jews had been persecuted for killing Jesus since the middle ages (along with other unlikely accusations such as making matzoh with infant gentile blood.) This doesn't excuse the actions of the Israeli government but is worth considering.
tearecords 2 years ago
well thx for answering and i would like to ask a lot more about your views as jewish but that is not the main objective on the vid.
And again i thank you for what you are saying here.
bananito2 2 years ago
5 stars, thanks
xplodetrain 2 years ago
Comment removed
davidcrampuk 2 years ago
Thank you for enlightening me on this! I was never aware of it.
I hope everything else is going well!
thepoet82 2 years ago
My pleasure. Everything is going well, thanks!
tearecords 2 years ago
What is the blood test called that diagnosis's a suppressive person again?
What's that you say?
It's their actions and thoughts and words that diagnose them?
Which imaging scan can count how many and how big the alien parasites on my Thetan are?
Oh that's right, LRH forgot to invent that breakthrough machine before he pysch drugged his ugly ass meat body and put it out of it's misery! duh
Anonymousobsessed 2 years ago
Thank you for posting this video !!!!!
sherlock90210 2 years ago
there is hard ware and there is software. the reason we dont call it "brain illness" is because brain is the hardware. mind is the software.
tehonearmedbandit 2 years ago
Drugs for depression/bipolar/schizophrenia/etc. don't work.They cause huge problems (most irreversible) in brain &nervous system.Pharma companies hide data & favor sleazy research to hide truth.Big Pharma has FDA in its pocket.Pharma, via perks/$/marketing,infiltratedUS Psychiatry,influenced Congress.Courts influenced by "experts" who believe propaganda&in$.News media not done homework. Media has no suspicion, no hunger to investigate, no scientific expertise.Pharma misleads doctors & public.
drwatw 2 years ago
Psychiatric drug grow womens breasts on little boys.
CBS Evening News May 25, 2009 Risperdal
A video recent report from CBS news showing young boys growing womens breasts because of the psych drugs they for treating ADHD.
One boy even producing milk out of his womans tit, hes just 7.
Google: The Drug of Choice - CBS video
To see.
Hasstradamus
Hasstradamus 2 years ago
hemp oil cures cancer - see 'run from the cure' video on youtube.
WTU208 2 years ago
have u excluded lyme disease as a diagnosis that could cause ur MS ?
maciejwrotek 2 years ago
No, I haven't excluded lyme disease - how would I tell if it were that?
tearecords 2 years ago
blood tests, ELISA (least reliable),Western Blot test, PCR and Real Time PCR tests,
maciejwrotek 2 years ago
Reported: German Schoolshooter also on antidepressants.
"The teen, underwent several treatment sessions for depression at a psychiatric clinic that year, said investigator Siegfried Mahler. He showed up for five sessions between April and September, and was expected to continue outpatient therapy at a different clinic, but never began it, Mahler said."
Google: "German police suspect chat room posts were faked"
Source: ass. press.
Hasstradamus
Hasstradamus 2 years ago
NO it is not medicine.
History of psychologie shows it all.
This dude who foundet it was on Coke man !!
These realy realy sick people screwed holes
in to the Human Scull because they thought it
would help. Oh sorry the did not say i want to screw a hole in your scull it could help, the fucking told the people they would know.
You are right untill today the Brain is a mistery
and we should not alow these pimps to poison our weakest, for the Dollar.
Letargian 2 years ago 4
yeah and doctors used to try and bleed infections out of people......
We are a little more informed now i think.
Some people may believe psychological problems are because of a chemical imbalance or some sort of past trauma.
Others believe these problems are caused by the souls of beings from outer space (thetans) somehow getting into peoples bodies, but not to worry, removal of these thetans is an easy process. Just pay the church of scientology and they will take care of them for you.
g0tt0rque 2 years ago
Hopefully theres still enough thinking people not drugged into stupidity and numbness to actually see the truth.
Personally I think the plan is to get everyone on these drugs to make us docile and controllable. Thats why they have these sweeping huge programs to get all the kids on psych drugs.
Is it just about money or something more sinister? I'm not sure.
coronet67 3 years ago 2
people go 2 psychiatrists bc they need HELP. some instances it does work. and some people go into see psychiatrists bc they are druggies and fake an illness to get the drugs. its the doctors job to be able to point out if they're faking. and another thing, have u ever considered that kids are on the drugs bc of their parents? in todays society the easy way out for an uncontrollable kid is having him diagnosed with ADD. parents go in, my kid has ADD boom u get pills. just slap the kid! discipline
pepsi879 2 years ago
u r right just bcuz some people abuse drugs or take the easy way out with their kids doesnt mean that psychiatry doestn work, yeah its true that they screwed holes in people's brain but psychiatry has come a long way
carjim524 2 years ago
To: glutamate23
I am really having a ball seeing all you pro-psychiatry goons thinking that everyone speaking out against the cult of psychiatry must be a Scientologist.
I think its an excellent example of self-inflicted paranoia.
The Only thing that is wrong with psychiatry is wel, huh, Psychiatry!
Here is an example on Dr. Joseph Biederman, a leading psychiatric researcher.
Hasstradamus 3 years ago
Currently the American Association of Psychiatry is under congressional investigation.
In early June 2008 it was reported to the US Congress that Dr. JOSEPH BIEDERMAN, a renowned child psychiatrist at Harvard Medical School, had earned at least $1.6 million in undisclosed frees from Big Parma between 2000 and 2007.
Now, Dr. JOSEPH BIEDERMAN is one of the world's most influential researchers in child psychiatry
Hasstradamus 3 years ago
He is widely admired for focusing the fields attention on its most troubled
"young patients".
Anywaysit was Dr. Biederman who spread far and wide the conviction that the emotional roller coaster of bipolar disorder can start "from the moment the child opened his eyes" at birth.
Youtube: drugging children & Yoism
Anyway, historically, psychiatrists used to regard bipolar disorder as a disease that begins in young adulthood, but now some diagnose it in children scarcely out of diapers.
Hasstradamus 3 years ago
Treating them with powerful antipsychotic medications based on Biederman's work.
Currently, There is about 2 million children on antipsychotics in the US, and I guess you could call that the result of Dr. Biederman his work.
I have 2 questions for you here:
1) Would you entrust your 4 year old kid to be put on powerful antipsychotic medications because some psychiatrists or GP claims that he is bi-polar?, because of the psychiatric opinion originated by Dr. J Biebermann?
Hasstradamus 3 years ago
He unlawfully earned more than 1.6 million from the pharmaceutical industry?
If your answer is yes, you should know that Dr. Biederman: The world-famous Bi-polar expert, who sold the idea of Bi-polar disorders in millions of children, his career is done and over with.
He will be fired from Harvard University were he was doing his bogus research from as he broke federal law accepting the funds he got from the Pharmaceutical industry.
Hasstradamus 3 years ago
This will discredit his junk-science convictions regarding bipolar disorder in kids and toddlers, as far as there was any science to begin with.
2) What do Scientologist have to do with the fact that psychiatry, when you take a hard and honest look at it, is nothing but junk science?
Is it the fault of scientologist that leading psychiatrists like Dr. Biedermann enrich themselves over the backs of innocent kids with all sort of bogus claims that have no scientific validation whatsoever?
Hasstradamus 3 years ago
Resulting in the world now believing that the emotional roller coaster of bipolar disorder can start "from the moment the child opened his eyes" at birth? Just as Biedermann Preached?
I call it the $1.6 million dollar J. Biedermann lie.
Here is a recent New York Times article that gives you more info on how leading research psychiatrists are bought and paid for by Big Parma, maybe you read it before you answer.
Google : Researchers Fail to Reveal Full Drug Pay
Peace.
Hasstradamus.
Hasstradamus 3 years ago
I'm having a hard time finding that publication. Can you please post the ISSN# of that publication so I can find it?
glutamate23 3 years ago
If you believe Aliens control psychiatrist and psychologist then yes you are as loopy as TC.
The debate may be good as Medicine side effects need to be monitored and it is up to the consumer to report them to their Doctors.
Unfortunately the poor get pushed aside on this issue and their voice is not as strong as those who have the cash to change to medicines that don't have as many or any side effects. Because of this, side effects are reported more often, then not.
exscikidchris 3 years ago
I would also like to add that interestingly enough there has been clinical studies which have shown that a small hippocampus is associated with my disorder and that taking paxil causes neurogenes in the hippocampus and alleviates the symptoms. Thus further proof that my disorder is biological. Look this up on pubmed com: Long-term treatment with paroxetine increases verbal declarative memory and hippocampal volume in posttraumatic stress disorder.
glutamate23 3 years ago
For some reason my previous comment did not post. I pretty much stated that I have been suffering from an anxiety disorder since I was a teen. For the longest time I tried counseling and used shear will to attempt to get better. I didnt like the idea of having to take psychiatric medications, because in my mind at that time only crazy people use psych drugs. Shear will and counseling didnt work for me. Lexapro is what worked for me and this proved to me that my disorder is biological.
glutamate23 3 years ago
You have a pretty narrow view of the issue. Counseling IS often crap. And often it takes a lot more than just 'getting over it' or ' sheer will'. It takes a whole change of mindset. I completely got over my anxiety and depression. The placebo effect is more than just 'thinking it will work', its also 'hoping it will work', and 'thinking it is working' when you feel a difference in your body because of the drug.
sociopathicregret 3 years ago
Ok well that is your opinion. From the way you talk about the mind, it seems like you think that the mind is not a byproduct of the brain. This is where me and you differ. I think every thought that comes out of your mind and my mind is the product of the biochemical interactions of neurons within our brain. Are you an undergraduate student?
glutamate23 3 years ago
Everything is technically opinion, how valid an opinion is in something more unknown (such as with the 'social sciences') depends on logic and reasoning. Of course the mind is technically related to the brain, but its more than the state of the brain is a byproduct of the environment. We're not evolved much more than 5,000 years ago, but our environment has changed a ton. To say that extreme emotional reactions are biological because they have a biological manifestation seems pretty silly.
sociopathicregret 3 years ago
Which of course means that basic parts of the brain are innate, but our complex psychological systems are primarily environmental (though indirectly influenced by genetics of basic personality perhaps). This is why these studies are so inconclusive. We don't understand enough about the subject to assume that association means anything more than indirect correlation, which again, is meaningless.
sociopathicregret 3 years ago
No the finding were not an indirect correlation. The finding are not an indirect correlation because in the control group there was no neurogenesis, while in the experimental group there was. The absence of neurogenesis in the control group which recieved placebo shows that the use of parexatine is the independent factor. The depent factor was neurogenesis in the hippocampus which depended on parexatine. Thus the physical change in the brain was a result of the use of the parexatine.
glutamate23 3 years ago
I looked at the study again, and it doesn't seem like any of that is there. Yet you're assuming all of this because it is just 'good science'. Either way, double blind studies in this area can be too easily violated because of the absence of enhanced placebo and other factors. They said quote "Based on animal studies, stress is associated with damage to the hippocampus". This is vague. Add in the fact that the study is small with some dropping out and you really don't have much. Stop assuming.
sociopathicregret 3 years ago
How do you think a psychological system changes from interactions with the enviroment. Does the mind change without there being changes in the brain? As a biology major I have been taught that enviromental variation causes genes to be turned on and off in cells which causes cells, tissues and organs to compensate for enviromental variation. The mind which is a byproduct of the brain would change when there is changes in gene regulation.
glutamate23 3 years ago
Did you even read what I said? Of course technically, everything emotional is related to the brain. But if you can change these 'brain' things by changing the environment when the environment fucked it up in the first place, why is it even relevant. You're describing the mechanisms of manifestations in the physical brain, which have nothing to do with the cause of solution to the problem.
sociopathicregret 3 years ago
The entire range of human behavior is the byproduct of the brain. All the complex psychological systems you speak of, are the by product of the brain. There is no behavior or emotion that is not rooted in the brain. There is no behavior that is rooted in the heart or in your colon. The human body is a complex biological machine. Every motion, breath, thought you make is all biologically rooted. This is what I have learned as a biology major. Are you an undergraduate? perhaps a psychology major?
glutamate23 3 years ago
Technically everything has a biological manifestation, but if the cause is not biological, biology is wholly irrelevant. You seem to be misunderstanding what I'm saying.
sociopathicregret 3 years ago
Of course we know (at least to some degree) the MECHANISM of the drug, but I see no reason to draw a conclusion that it 'alleviates the symptoms'. 'Improvement' is nearly impossible to gauge with current 'techniques' and the placebo effect can easily play a major role. You again point to correlations as some kind of 'proof' that the disorder is biological. Correlations are meaningless and there are many, many ways this can easily be so. Basically, your study doesn't say anything about causation.
sociopathicregret 3 years ago
Ok maybe my personal experience is a correlation. I cant prove empiracly that my improvement was to taking the medication alone. But the clinical study shows that there is a physical change in the brain, after treatment. Does this paper publication imply this is the sole causation of the disease; no it does not. This study just showed that there is a structural change in the brain before and after treatment which was ASSOCIATED with peroxetine treatment.
glutamate23 3 years ago
The physical change in the brain isn't necessarily because of the drug, and doesnt necessarily translate to 'improvement'. That's the problem. Association is meaningless.
sociopathicregret 3 years ago
When someone takes mood altering drugs, of the non-prescribed kind, and is happier for awhile, people don't tend to say that its 'helping' them or 'benefiting' them. So I don't see why it would be any different for another 'mood altering drug'. And this is WITHOUT the reality that there's no objective evidence of benefit (due to a host of reasons, one being that 'benefit' is a weasel word in these clinical trials), and that the placebo effect is huge.
sociopathicregret 3 years ago
What's your point? If any meds work, whether OTC or RX, they will be used. They are all tested against the placebo (and other drugs), of course, so if they alleviate psychiatric symptoms and are agree-able with patients, the adverse effects and drug interaction profiles are weighed against it to determine the OTC or Rx med's usefulness. If you think the field of psychology is fundamentally unable to tell if a patient has improved outcome, then just maybe "benefit" is the right term. Get it?
iseeboredpeople 3 years ago
My point is 1) they don't really 'work' and 2) since this chemical imbalance crap is bull, they're no better than any other mood altering drug. If they were just honest when prescribing them and said it was just a mood altering agent which would numb you up, I doubt so many people would take them.
And no, benefit is not a satisfactory term, because that is also a weasel word.
sociopathicregret 3 years ago
Right dude, heroin = buproprion. I forgot. You're right. I give up.
iseeboredpeople 3 years ago
No, it is not. There are different strengths of drugs. But in basic mechanism, its really no different.
sociopathicregret 3 years ago
wow
iseeboredpeople 3 years ago
You cant compare taking extasy or smoking crack cocaine or any other illegal drug to psychiatric medications. For one a lot of illegal drugs cause brain damage, while for example antidepressants have been seen to
initiat neurogenesis in PTSD patients. When a drug is going to be used therapeutically, you have to weigh the benefits with the costs. Sure some of the side effects suck such as sexual side effects and weight gain, however if the medication makes symptoms subside then it is worth it.
glutamate23 3 years ago
And neuroleptic drugs can cause Parkinsonism or tardive dyskinesia. Weight gain, we are told, can kill people. The evidence for illegal drugs causing permanent brain damage is in many cases inconclusive.
If the drugs works for you, use them.
tearecords 3 years ago
The peroxidative DNA damage and apoptosis inmethamphetamine-treated rat brain. ISSN# 1349-6867. I found the article on pubmed com
Theres a scientific article that says meth causes brain damage. Methamphetamine cause apoptosis (cell death) in neurons.
I found another interesting article that says they found biological markers to detect brain injury after continous use of cocaine.
Brain injury markers (S100B and NSE) in chronic cocaine dependents. ISSN: 1516-4446
Drugs are bad MKAY!
glutamate23 3 years ago
Drugs are bad if used irresponsibly. The worst is probably alcohol. Do anything to excess and it's likely to cause measurable problems - drink enough coffee and you'll die of caffeine poisoning. The evidence for brain damage from regular prescribed dosages of neuroleptics is powerful and even psychiatrists don't dispute it - they just say it's an unfortunate side-effect of otherwise good medicine.
tearecords 3 years ago
Secondly, if you have this little faith in science from the bench to the clinic, then you must also have a mistrust of the field of psychology, which has always (along with psychiatry) faced an "eye of the beholder" problem because they are (in part) BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES. Thirdly, I'd like to ask that you don't spread disinformation on the internet. Fox News is bad enough on TV; There's no need for an even worse distortion on the net aimed at using propaganda and fear to promote another cause.
iseeboredpeople 3 years ago
OK, as an MD, I feel obligated to post. What you and Mr. Cruise both do not understand is that whether or not someone with depression has what you keep calling a "chemical imbalance," doesn't mean that drugs designed to alter neurotransmission are not working to benefit people with psychological disorders. No...we will probably never find a brain scan that can undeniably show that a depressed brain is a not a brain without depressive symptoms, but this isn't the crux of the matter either.
iseeboredpeople 3 years ago
It doesn't completely, by itself, stop the 'possibility' of it, but it makes them far less credible since they claim that their drugs treat 'chemical imbalances'. And also, few deny that these drugs have effects. However, if they don't 'treat' a specific 'chemical imbalance', that means that they're just another mood altering drug, which puts it in the realm of other mood altering drugs.
sociopathicregret 3 years ago
Sure, marijuana and cocaine are mood altering drugs, so if you want to put them in the same "realm" as antidepressants or even steroids, then that's fine. And we don't know if there's an actual "imbalance." This is suggested (inferred from lesion studies, genetics, and bench science), but we know where the drugs are working just as we know where cocaine and heroin work. However, cocaine and heroin have extremely limited clinical usage. They are far cries from each other.
iseeboredpeople 3 years ago
In addition to that, someone who has their emotions fucked with will have a harder time figuring themselves out. It's not really 'suggested' at all, and I'd say that the majority of psychiatry backers say that its 'proven'. Of course extreme drugs aren't really useful as 'treatment' options, but neither are psychiatric drugs. Psych drugs don't yield a crazy high, but they do have something in common with those drugs, which is extreme withdrawal effects.
sociopathicregret 3 years ago
I'm not against people using any drugs to wash the pain away temporarily, people should have the right to do whatever they want, but to say that these drugs are objectively helpful like a lot of doctors who prescribe them do, or that they treat some chemical imbalance, ignoring the withdrawal effects and side effects, and on top of this acting as though people have 'biological diseases requiring treatment'....well thats all uninformed consent.
sociopathicregret 3 years ago
To: iseeboredpeople,
Maybe as an MD you would liek to respond to my comment, you should find it at the top page of the remarks.
Hasstradamus
Hasstradamus 3 years ago
This guy is a SCIENTOLIGIST pretending to be a non scientologist.
One thing that you are wrong about is that there is physical finding on schizophrenia. For one there is something called ventricles in the brain which are larger in schizophrenics. Secondly there have been pet scans which show there is a difference in concentrations of dopamine in shizophrenics. The reason from what I understand that all suspected shizophrenics dont get these tests is because they are expensive.
glutamate23 3 years ago
Irrelevant, brain changes to adapt to the environment, you're confusing causation with correlation.
sociopathicregret 3 years ago
How is that irrevelant? These are physical finding that are localized in the schizophrenic population. Also I would like to point out that antipsychotics reduce the high amount of dopamine in the brain, which is followed by the resolution of psychotic symptoms. The high amount of dopamine in schizophrenics through pet scans and the reduction of dopamine through the use of antipsychotics implicates that dopamine is a neurotransmitter that plays a role in psychosis.
glutamate23 3 years ago
It is irrelevant because correlation =/= causation. Just because you find something in the brain doesn't mean it 'caused' the problem, it means its just correlated with it. Which is entirely meaningless.
Sure, antipsychotics reduce dopamine, which reduces symptoms. That's meaningless too. You dull a person's entire brain, their symptoms of a complex emotional problem fade because their entire brain is dulled. 'Plays a role' is a meaningless pithy statement, too.
sociopathicregret 3 years ago
And that's neglecting the fact that many of these 'brain scans' are after drugging/ECT has taken place. But that's not even necessary to point out because it's well documented that brain plasticity applies to many things, the only reason it hasn't been applied to 'mental disorders' is because of bias in the 'medical research' field, specifically psychiatry.
sociopathicregret 3 years ago
The post above this is disinformation. Concerning the post above that one, you mean to say associated, not correlated, which proves your point further. But...Associations are just clues and stepping stones to finding an answer. However, the drugs are used because they can possibly improve a patient's quality of life despite having side effects. Yet I think you're wanting to make medicine into a problem-solution profession more likened to repair work, but it is not anywhere near that simple.
iseeboredpeople 3 years ago
I meant to say correlated, because that's what it is...but I suppose you could use association as well. My point is that the drugs are used because they're profitable and give people hope for a quick fix when there really is none. Depends what you mean 'improve the quality of life'. Suppress symptoms through suppressing the whole brain, sure, maybe making that person more docile and easy to deal with, but its not actually solving the problem.
sociopathicregret 3 years ago
Now thats just outright wrong dude. In clinical studies you have to have a control. Its not that hard to petscan someone right before giving them medication in order for that patient to serve as a control. Also a petscan is a diagnostic tool, meaning that its used to assist the physician make a diagnoses. Pet Scans are usually taken after being medicated when the patient is in a clinical study.
glutamate23 3 years ago
Not always. Often in these studies these people have a 'history' of long term psychiatric drug use even if they're not necessarily using it at the time. If you're talking about gauging the brain effects of a drug, then sure. But since the biological brain is only the manifestation of the environment (to a large degree), I'm not sure why it's relevant.
sociopathicregret 3 years ago
No its not entire meaningless. Its one of the factors that is associated with psychosis. Of course its not the only factor. There is a multitude of factors such as enviromental factors and gentics. However to say dopamine levels is irrelevant in psychosis studies which is seen in a large number of patients is just not smart science.
glutamate23 3 years ago
This isn't about science at all. Science is irrelevant. There will obviously be biological manifestations of psychological problems because the brain is a biological entity, but they're irrelevant because the brain changes to the ENVIRONMENT. So it's the environment/psychological state that is the problem, not some 'broken brain'.
sociopathicregret 3 years ago
The pet scan evidence I can find is derived from from "meta-analysis" of old data. "this meta-analysis revealed a small (12 percent) but significant elevation of striatal D2 receptors in untreated patients with schizophrenia. No clinical correlates of increased D2 receptor binding parameters could be identified." The report concludes "Imaging studies of D1 receptors have consistently failed to detect abnormalities of D1 receptor availability in the striatum of patients with schizophrenia"
tearecords 3 years ago
I am so completely NOT a Scientologist! Would a scientologist admit to smoking cannabis as a medicine? Check out my video response above.
These tests you talk about are far from confirmed as clinically significant. This is the conclusion of a recent study into ventricle size and schizophrenia: "results suggest that genetics have a stronger influence on the shape of lateral ventricles than do the disease-related changes in schizophrenia."
tearecords 3 years ago
So why did you post the same comment you posted 2 days ago? Ok fine your not a scientologist. I get it. Dude all these studies you talk about are meaningless if I cant read them. Give me an ISSN number of the study or the exact title and what journal the study is in. I would be very interested in reading those publications.
glutamate23 3 years ago
I posted the same reply because it didn't appear as a reply to your comment the first time so I thought you might not have seen it.
The study I'm referring to was published in PNAS and is titled "Morphometric analysis of lateral ventricles in schizophrenia and healthy controls regarding genetic and disease-specific factors". Published online before print March 16, 2005, doi: 10.1073/pnas.0501117102 PNAS March 29, 2005 vol. 102 no. 13 4872-4877
You should be able to find it easily.
tearecords 3 years ago
I've posted a comment for you some days ago, did you read it?
Hasstradamus 3 years ago
enjoyed the vid, thanks very much. for your own interest, try looking up the "monoamine hypothesis" for depression and the dexamethasone suppression test for depression. btw, there are plenty of medical diagnoses such as carpal tunnel syndrome, alzhemier's disease (neurological), appendicitis (you have to perform the treatment -surgery - before you even know if this person has appendicitis), etc that dont have black-and-white tests. clinical evidence and trials speak louder than blood tests.
dinabio1 3 years ago
In short, I want to tell you is that psychiatry, for all its claims, belongs in the same class as a Religion or a Cult, just as scientology, Christianity or Confucianism and such
As far as Psychiatry being willing to be open about its research and has codes
goolge:
Investigation of Glaxo's Paxil widens: paper
A recent article from Reuters, it seems that GlaxoSmithKline has withheld suicide information on Paxil and there are voices now in the US to launch a congressional investigation.
Hasstradamus 3 years ago
Zyprexa: Google: Disparity Emerges in Lilly Data on Schizophrenia Drug
Illy lilly hides the fact that their blockbuster anti-psychotic zyprexa can cause diabetes. Fined to pay out 1.2 billion to settle the lawsuits. Hundreds of thousands of children have been on this drug. Kids diagnosed with Difficult behaviour and made up ADHD.
Should I go on why you can't drug up people without hard scientific evidence?
Hasstradamus 3 years ago
A February 2008 study found that, compared with placebo, the new-generation antidepressants DO NOT PRODUCE CLINICALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENTS in depression in patients who initially have moderate or even very severe depression, but show significant effects only in the most severely depressed patients.
Why was this study done? Because "some doubts" remained about the clinical efficacy of these anti-depressants. (and given the results I'd say that this was well justified)
Hasstradamus 3 years ago
Most people who take those drugs aren't "severely" depressed, I'm sure you know this, so why bring up the argument of "schizophrenia", as usual.
The researchers of this paper obtained data on all the clinical trials submitted to the FDA for the licensing of fluoxetine (prozac), venlafaxine (effexor), nefazodone, and paroxetine (paxil) + the negative studies that had been deliberately LEFT OUT
Hasstradamus 3 years ago
Again: The overall effect of new generation antidepressants is BELOW the recommended criteria for CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE. There was almost no difference in the improvement for drug and placebo in patients with moderate depression and only a SMALL AND CLINICALLY INSIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE AMONG PATIENTS WITH VERY SEVERE DEPRESSION
Hasstradamus 3 years ago
Again psychiatry is more cult or pseudo science then anything else.
Is this the openness you were revering to in your comment?
Don't take my word for it. Google:
"Initial Severity and Antidepressant Benefits: A Meta-Analysis of Data Submitted to the Food and Drug Administration"
Hasstradamus
Hasstradamus 3 years ago
sounds like you got a Royal Screw..but then again, you live in England!!
lambstar 3 years ago
Worse things happen at sea... and in Amerika!
tearecords 3 years ago
I agree with you on the fact that most medications screw around with you before you find the right one. However, some psychiatrists do actually know what they are practicing. Mental illness has always existed, it is just receiving more light now as it has always been kicked to the side. They can be traced through biological, environmental or psychological factors. By 2020, major depressive illness will be the leading cause of disability in the world for women and children. Research more.
crystalfairie 3 years ago
The symptoms that are called mental illness have always existed but the concept of biological origin is a relatively recent one. In the past and in other cultures the symptoms have been thought to have spiritual causes. Why do you think major depressive illness is rising so fast? Is there a biological cause or are people feeling increasingly hopeless in a world where emotions are considered unimportant compared with running in the rat race?
tearecords 3 years ago
Mental Illnesses are NOT symptoms. Fact! Studies prove mental illnesses are caused by physical, social, environmental, psychological causes. This has been proven, many times. In 2020 it's est. that depressive illnesses will become the second leading cause of disease burden worldwide. We need doctors and psychologists to help. With people like you, who say psychiatrists are useless and mental illness are symptoms, no wonder people give up.
crystalfairie 3 years ago
Why do you think major depressive illness is rising so fast? Is it perhaps that people are feeling increasingly lost and confused in our emotionless and spiritually lacking culture? A better cure might be to bring some love and compassion into our world not just to medicate people until they don't care any more. But that wouldn't be cost effective.
tearecords 3 years ago
Well, if you think that someone who can walk on water, raise the dead, feed the 5000 with just a handful of fishes and a couple of loaves of bread, would be locked up today as being a loon...I think you have seriously lost your argument mate! Before you start spouting of about religion. Try reading the Bible, the Qu'ran, the Tora for starters. then maybe I will take you seriously. I have & thats is why I know you are talking bollocks!
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago
Are you saying that you think a modern psychiatrist would believe those stories? He'd listen, take into account that the patient was hearing the voice of the devil telling him to kill himself and then lock him up - for his own protection. The equivalent authorities of the time were the Romans and they crucified him! Why do you assume that I haven't read those books?
tearecords 3 years ago
It was about Jesus's actions with the people that showed he was the son of God. A psychiatrist would not be able to argue with that.
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago
You really believe that, even though the only evidence we have is that the religious and secular authorities of the time argued with it? Popularity or even being the son of God wouldn't interfere with a modern medical diagnosis - how could they?. Psychiatrists would have to regard auditory hallucinations as signs of a chemical imbalance as they have no other explanation for them.
tearecords 3 years ago
Okay. Personally, I believe that mental illness is on the rise because of many causes. The fact that we have people going around who don't know what to do with themselves. There are emotions in this world. Perhaps, if everyone just looked a little harder, they would find that there are emotions and spirituality still flowing throughout the world. And cost effective? What would be more cost effective? Not being here at all.
crystalfairie 3 years ago
not interested in changing your mind on scientology. don't have to. what does the word mean?
tylerrotty 3 years ago
Cambridge dictionary definition:
cult (RELIGION)
noun [C]
1 a religious group, often living together, whose beliefs are considered extreme or strange by many people:
Their son ran away from home and joined a religious cult.
2 a particular system of religious belief:
the Hindu cult of Shiva
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago
ok, good. now, the only trouble with this definition is it's very general. what i mean is that, per this definition, every religion fits it. wouls you say that all religions are "cults"? if not, look deeper.
tylerrotty 3 years ago
oxford dictionary:
cult • noun 1 a system of religious worship directed towards a particular figure or object. 2 a small religious group regarded as strange or as imposing excessive control over members. 3 something popular or fashionable among a particular section of society. — DERIVATIVES cultish adjective cultist noun. — ORIGIN Latin cultus 'worship'.
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago
very good. oxford is better, though this is stl general, but look. the word cult derives from meaning worship. scientology does not employ worship as one of its tenets. we don't worship. so up to now, all religions APART FROM SCIENTOLOGY can be defined as "cults". i don't think that islam is a cult, or christianity, or any other of the major religions so is there further definition?
tylerrotty 3 years ago
Not enough space on comments field. To answer that one I need to send you an email....But you have blocked your profile to me....Up to you on that one!
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago
No..Only those like Scientology who refuse point blank to tell the origins of their "religion". If I ask that question to a legitimate religion they will tell freely and honestly...CO$ does not...So come on then tell me?
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago
the below comment on scientology was meant specifically for crisbianfloyde
tylerrotty 3 years ago
Scientology is not a religion. In fact it's not even a science! It's nothing more than a pyramid sales scheme dressed up to look like a religion. Hubbard was a despicable individual who tortured his second wife, kidnapped his child, was a drug addict and a paranoid schizophrenic. I feel sorry for anyone who is gullible enough to follow his teachings. Co$ destroys families and goes out of the way to destroy its critics.
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago
What sort of person in their right mind would ever want to be part of such an insidious cult like Scientology? The Co$ use mind control techniques and the Co$ teachings actually damages health. There is nothing about the Co$ that is remotely likeable! The quicker this disgusting cult is shut down the better! I feel sorry for you if you can not see that tylerrotty. How many of your love ones have you disconnected from in the name of this cult?
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago
in answer to your question i have disconnected from no family. there is nothing in scientology on disconnecting from family. it is something that is avoided. so, can you not answer my question, why are you terrified of scientology? the troublw with your comments on LRH and scientology is that they are baseless. why are you so terrified it? in answering please note that i am being perfectly civil and am making no attempt to block you, despite your claims of my religion so keep it rational please.
tylerrotty 3 years ago
My comments on Hubbard and Scientology are from baseless tylerrotty. Unlike you, I am willing to go and search for the truth. Like most Scientologist you only believe what the Co$ want you to believe. Everything I said about Hubbard is true. Go and read the affidavit from his second wife. Go read up on operation Snow white and the list goes on and on!!!!
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago
On top of which. If you really believe that the Heterosexual actor Tom Cruise has read all the evidence then you are an idiot! There are millions of books on Psychiatry and he reckons he has read them all? Give me a break! Psychiatry cures people...Scientology doesn't! Psychiatrists spend years studying real data by real scientists. Scientologist make theirs up! Psychiatry has been around since 5BC and was not invented by the Nazi's!!!
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago
i see. so you can't read i see, as this non-sequitur response is completely random and pertains, factually, to nothing. shame. get in touch with "Applied Scholastics" as they can help you to be able to read and learn. if you're lucky the psychs won't get you, although you apparently agree with their practises.
tylerrotty 3 years ago
You really are spoon fed aren't you! I see you refuse to go and look for the evidence. How typical of a Scientologist!
The Affidavit from Hubbard's 2nd wife has all the evidence about him and his mental illness, his drug addiction, the torture he committed on her and the fact that he kidnapped their child.
Why are you afraid to read the affidavit and why are afraid to read about operation Snow White?
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago
You are simply relaying what you read on the internet. That is poor research. As a legal researcher I know none of your familiar repetitions are sound. Scn. is a religion per the Eu court of Human rights 2007. Also in 2007 Caberta failed to provide any evidence after 10 years to support a ban. If you must make criticisms, do this objectively examining all angles to obtain a fair balance. The internet is an information highway containing a wealth of data but also heaps of garbage.
whichphilosophy 3 years ago
I see you are so worried about the truth of my comments that you have blocked me tylerrotty! So typical of a Scientologist to try and block out the truth. I hope you can finally see the truth about the evils of Scientology before it is to late for you tylerrotty.
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago
I tried answering your email, but I see you have still blocked my replies, but I see you are still frightened of me answering. If you unblocked me and was truly open to debate like you say then I will happily answer your questions. Balls in your court. I can give the answer you want or you can continue keeping your head in your sand...What's it to be?
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago
I can't find your e-mail which is factually wrong. Scientology is not banned in Germany you clown. The Charities commission did not call it a cult and have no legal power to do so. Did you read what they actually said?
whichphilosophy 3 years ago
A Psycyhiatrist does not speak of cures. Go and ask a psychiatrist how many people they have cured. They will sometimes laugh They speak of treating. Do you have a reference of psychiatry curing anything?
whichphilosophy 3 years ago
5BC? Wow, that's a long time to research an illness and still not find the cause! Over 2000 years and still not even one physical test to see if someone is ill or better. Talking of history, Christianity was considered a dangerous cult by the Roman Empire for nearly three hundred years after its founder, a bully and torturer, started it. Watch out!!!
tearecords 3 years ago
Are really stupid enough to say Jesus was a bully and a torturer?
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago
Jesus didn't found a religion; he was Jewish. Paul was the founder of Christianity and he had formally worked for the Romans persecuting the followers of Jesus. That was until his conversion on the road to Damascus.
tearecords 3 years ago
WRONG! Jesus was and is the basis of Christianity! Before Paul came along...Which was nearly 30 years after the death of Jesus. Jesus's Brother James and Jesus's Apostles were already spreading the word of Christ. Paul started the Catholic church...Not Christianity!
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago
Ok, I've clearly hit a nerve there! Let's just agree that there is scholarly debate about the question. How about this one though: If Jesus were around today he would very likely be diagnosed as schizophrenic, sectioned and forced to take anti-psychotics. Modern psychiatry has no other explanation for his behaviour except as the result of a mental illness.
tearecords 3 years ago
A quick answer to your question as you are to afraid to let me email you the truth tylerrotty..
Q1. I am terrified of nothing
Q. I have known 7 people from Co$ ranging from OT2 to OT4
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago
fear doesn't come in to blocking you. you're with anonymous, and by that i mean you support their acions. your irrational views are based on nothing more than fantasy. as for having known these OT's, why do you not still know them? to be honest i'm not interested in you as this line of antagonism is just boring. i know why people fear scientology. it's their own acts that they wish not be uncovered. i have one piece of advice, clear the definition of "cult" as you have a misunderstood there.
tylerrotty 3 years ago
Answers:
3 committed suicide, 1 had a complete psychotic episode (1 of the OT4's!)and got locked away, 1 went travelling around the world and we lost contact, 1 died in the first gulf war and the other turned out to be complete idiot and they disconnected from all their friends and family.
I am not with anon...that is why I use my real name on my profile.
Co$ is a cult and I will not change my opinion unless proven otherwise!
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago
cult. what does it mean? use a good dictionary
tylerrotty 3 years ago
Merriam webster dictionary:
1: formal religious veneration : worship2: a system of religious beliefs and ritual; also : its body of adherents3: a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its body of adherents4: a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago
To: crisbianfloyde
Cult: 4: a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator.
Did you ever give it a thougth that Psychiatry migth fit this definition?
Actually it has been called a cult for this in the past.
Not a lot of things have been changed since then, scientifically.
Hasstradamus 3 years ago
And how long have you been a Scientologist?
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago
I don't see what that has to do with my questions.
Stay on point please.
Is psychiatry a cult or not?
Hasstradamus 3 years ago
No psychiatry is not a cult...Now answer my question...How long have you been a Scientologist?
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago
For 18 years.
Hasstradamus 3 years ago
Can you tell me why psychiatry is not a cult, because when it comes to mental illness there is no scientific test for any mental illness, so it basically comes down to the opinion of the psychiatrist. Ad on top of that that it is unknown how anti-depresseants work (as you can read on the information leavlets), one can't even scientifically show when a cure is effected other then taking the pasient his word for it, again unscientific
A person saying he feels better is not scientific validation
Hasstradamus 3 years ago
Re: A person saying he feels better is not scientific validation.
I don't wont to come down on you too hard, but its really not scientific validation.
Its the practise of witch doctors, high priests or even scientology auditors and bhudist monks if you want me to kick it like that.
Psychiatry, proclaiming to be a science, and not a cult or religion should do better then that. Otherwise it belongs in the same group.
A normal doctor tests for cures, and so should psychiatry. No exuse
Hasstradamus 3 years ago
I'll answer your questions when you answer mine......How long have you been a Scientologist? The fact that you refuse to answer tells me that you are a $cilon. I've answered you 1st question. Now do me the same courtesy...How long have you been a Scientologist?
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago
to crisbianfloyde:
I did answer your question below.
I've been in Scientology for 18 years.
I didn't respond to you straigth away because you didn't answer my question but tried to side-track the subject we are discussing here: if psychiatry is pseudo-science or not.
This is not a vid on scientology, we can talk about that later if you want.
I also tell you some comments below why I do see psychiatry as a cult.
Please read and comment back on that and stay on point.
Hasstradamus 3 years ago
Some manners wouldn't go a miss Hasstradamus! Try please and thank you rather than making demands. I personally don't feel that psychiatry is psuedo-science. Scientology on the hand is a cult and is definitely a psuedo-science as well as crimes against humanity. The way you attack with your writing told me straight away you are $cilon. If you want to discuss, then talk to me and not at me. If you want to talk, then please send me a pm...Happy to discuss.
crisbianfloyde 3 years ago